Xi’s Lapdogs

Xi’s Lapdogs. By David Archibald.

The last time Xi was in trouble politically, Albanese went off and spent a week in China, doing nothing.

I thought at the time that the Chicoms had summoned Albanese to make Xi look important. The Chinese love it when foreign leaders come to Beijing to kowtow.

Xi is in big trouble at the moment and Starmer announces a visit at short notice. Coincidence? I think not.

Society punishes one form of Jew hate while applauding another

Society punishes one form of Jew hate while applauding another. By Brendan O’Neill in The Australian.

What an idiot Brandan Koschel is. “Jews are the greatest enemy to this nation,” he told the mob at the March for Australia in Sydney on Monday. And now he finds himself behind bars, suspected of publicly inciting hatred.

 

Brandan Koschel punished

 

Doesn’t he know you’re meant to say “Zionist”, not “Jew”? That if you really want to let rip against Those People, then the Z-word is your safest bet?

You can rage and splutter all day long about how Zionists are the enemy of Australia — of the entire West, in fact — and the police won’t lay a finger on you. You can say Zionists are a stain on humanity and no prison cell will await you.

You can call Zionists “terrorists”, a “cancer” and “genocidal maniacs” and, far from being banged up, you’ll win a hearty round of applause at every Guardianista soiree in the land.

The very people who said “That’s a bit much” about Koschel’s comment on Jews would say “Well said, sir” if he’d used the Z-word instead.

 

Academic Randa-Abdel-Fattah rewarded (by the Adelaide Book Festival)

 

The arrest of Koschel has really brought home the hypocrisy and futility of speech-punishing laws.

For here we have the state making an example of a man with poisonous beliefs while doing precisely nothing to challenge the sneakier antisemitism that runs riot among the activist class, in digital spaces and even in institutions. …

We all know who the Z-word refers to – Jews who support the existence of a Jewish homeland. Which is the vast majority of them. Polls consistently find that close to 80 per cent of Aussie Jews identify as Zionists. …

Same-same:

To some of us, these two camps, both the vulgar Jew-baiters and the myopic Zio-bashers, are two cheeks of the same arse.

I’m continually struck by the commonalities between hard right-wingers who bemoan Jews and soppy leftists who bemoan the Jewish state. …

The furious anti-Zionism of “respectable society” is a wily, coded version of the hatred that festers on the far right.

The Z-word gives the activist class a get-out-of-jail card.  … It really does get them out of jail. So where Koschel gets locked up for saying Jews are the enemy of civilisation, his better-educated compatriots are free to say Zionists are the enemy of civilisation. Everyone with a functioning moral compass knows they mean the same thing.

Vague laws and selective enforcement negate the rule of law and allow class warfare to flourish.

Ukraine And The Gamification Of Combat: Market Replaces Centralized Control

Ukraine And The Gamification Of Combat: Market Replaces Centralized Control. By Tamat Jacoby at Forbes.

 

The tall, bearded officer, code-named Prickly — like all Ukrainian fighters, he uses a call sign to protect his identity and his family from wartime retaliation — is proud as a peacock of what he has done in six months at the helm of his frontline drone unit. In an interview with me, Prickly gave some of the credit to Kyiv’s new “e-point” system, called the Army of Drones Bonus.

“We’ve improved our performance by a factor of 10,” Prickly said. “We know that thanks to the drone points system, which measures how many men we kill and how much equipment we destroy.”

After more than three and a half years of fighting, drones have transformed the battlefield in Ukraine. Every operation depends on uncrewed platforms, either to carry out the mission or protect soldiers. Units work with an increasingly varied drone arsenal — large and small devices, powered by rotors and fixed wings, guided by radio waves and fiber optic cables. Kyiv and Moscow are locked in a deadly technology race, constantly competing to counter the other side’s latest developments, and things change so fast that an wounded fighter returning to the front after just a few months away can no longer recognize his unit’s tactics. Estimates suggest that unmanned aerial vehicles are responsible for up to 80% of battlefield casualties. …

The top brass in Kyiv struggle to keep up with this innovation — both the new technology and its use on a highly decentralized battlefield. Drone production is scattered and diverse, with the Ukrainian drone company DroneUA estimating that as many as 700 companies and 500 suppliers are now churning out UAVs of every description. …

The armed forces also strive to take advantage of decentralization, harnessing it to drive innovation and effectiveness on the battlefield. That’s where the point system comes in — allowing fighters to bypass the bureaucracy in Kyiv and buy weapons directly from manufacturers.

Frontline commander Prickly said that drone pilots save video clips of the damage they do — whether destroying machinery or killing Russian soldiers. The unit prepares a daily montage and sends it to the Ministry of Defense, where experts comb over the footage to confirm the unit’s claims and confer points for verified destruction.

The allocation changes regularly, but as of June 2025, Business Insider reported that destroying a tank was worth eight points. A multiple launch rocket system counted for 10. Killing a regular Russian soldier earned 12 points. Wounding a drone pilot was valued at 15 and eliminating him netted 25.

In the final step, the payoff, units use the points they’ve earned to purchase equipment — drones, drone jamming devices, ammunition, and other goods — on Brave1 Market, an online shopping platform not unlike Amazon.

Drones change everything. Wait until they are controlled by AI, or miniaturized to the size of insects for espionage.

The Russians have about caught up in terms of numbers and quality of drones. But Russia has always relied soley on centralized controls. So, it will be interesting to see if they make the leap to the decentralized, market-based gamification system pioneered by the Ukrainians.

Stop saying ‘radical’ and ‘extremist’ Islam, top Australian imam demands

Stop saying ‘radical’ and ‘extremist’ Islam, top Australian imam demands. By Elizabeth Pike in The Australian.

The nation’s imams have demanded an end to the use of terms like “radical Islam” and “extremist Islam”, as they claim former prime minister Scott Morrison’s push for reform in their leadership of being reckless and irresponsible. …

ANIC leader Sheik Shadi Alsuleiman has gone further, declaring terrorism and Islam should not be linked at all and that terms describing radical Islamist ideologies are damaging social cohesion.

Alexandra Marshall.

The reason for the demand is obvious.

You are NOT ALLOWED to criticise Islam directly without being dragged before 18C or the Race Discrimination Commission.

By banning the use of ‘radical’ and ‘extremist’ it would be IMPOSSIBLE to criticise Islamic terrorist activities, cultural practices, or religious hatred spoken by members of the faith.

It would give a completely free pass to the most dangerous branches of Islam and prevent the West from defending its society, culture, peace, and safety.

Hate preachers would become immune to the law.

Islamic hate groups would be exempt from the new legislation designed to disband them.

Instead, Australians MUST BE ALLOWED TO PROPERLY CRITICISE ISLAM ITSELF. This is meant to be our inherited right. Every other religion submits itself to criticism.

If you criticize Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism or Confucianism, you are a critic.

But if you criticize Islam you are an Islamophobe, bigot, and a racist.

Now some Imams are even claiming terror and Islam are not linked (a complete inversion — see the religion of peace), and wish to outlaw linking the words “radical” and “extremist” to Islam. Awesomely ambitious ambit claim. Yet, our lefties will fall for it.

 

And

If the 50m Muslims in Europe were one country, it would be one of the biggest Muslim countries in the world

If the 50m Muslims in Europe were one country, it would be one of the biggest Muslim countries in the world. By Mohammed Hijab.

Our numbers are massive. There’s 50,000,000 Muslims in Europe.

There’s more Muslims in Europe than there are in some Muslim majority countries.

If all the Muslims in Europe were one country, it would be one of the biggest Muslim countries in the world. That’s the truth.

So that means we need to start acting like the Muslim community have to become the consequence.

We have to start acting as if we have the upper hand because we do.

 

Australian bureaucracy costs too much

Australian bureaucracy costs too much. By Flat White in The Spectator.

In the past, Australia modelled itself on the tried-and-true equation of a hardworking private sector coupled with mining wealth and valuable exports. This provided enough loose change to run a bloated, parasitic bureaucracy where we penned-in the destructive academics and miserable communists. …

That bureaucracy has gorged itself on the labour of the middle and working classes and bred like rabbits, overpopulating existing roles before spilling into the free market.

Not satisfied with eating into the private sector, the public system has created new commissions, academic circles, arts industries, (monstrous) health entities, a grievance culture, and the culturally lethal activist machine that threatens the fabric of Australian society. The sheer size of this malignant entity is a terminal condition.

Taking Javier Milei’s chainsaw to wasted public sector money would fix the economy. This won’t happen. Grievance and laziness have become political white bread to Labor without which they’d starve.

The bill comes due:

And so it comes to pass that Jim Chalmers has presided over a mess he can no longer bury in the spreadsheets.

Today’s panicked headlines about inflation were written the moment Anthony Albanese’s team was re-elected. …

Most of the socialists in power enjoy multi-million-dollar property portfolios. This is not hypocrisy, because money taken from taxpayers is virtuous while money earned from scratch is evil capitalism. The only poor socialists are useful idiots. You’ll never meet a poor socialist in power, because they’re not idiots. They have turned leeching into an expression of moral purity.

Families, however, are dreading the next Reserve Bank Announcement following the Consumer Price Index rising 3.8 per cent in 12 months. …

Never mind that Labor’s policy decision to import half a million people in a year pushed up total spending, even if individual Australians tightened their belt and spent less.

And of course, the government doesn’t want to talk about its outrageous spending spree on foreign countries, renewable energy, the NDIS, or even their own travel expenses and phone bills. …

Let’s quietly point out that the reckless spending of the Morrison years were thanks to Covid, the NDIS, and Net Zero. All of these were policies supported and cheered on by Labor… And how do we know Labor would have been worse? Look at Victoria’s finances… There’s your hint.

Could socialists manage a paper money system? Of course not. The debasement trade is gathering momentum. Yes, gold is partly up on geopolitical alarm right at the moment, but the main reason is that big financial smarties — starting in NY — are re-balancing their portfolios to include precious metals for the first time in decades. (Gold equities have barely moved yet. A lot of catch up to do.)

Australia’s two-tier policing of hate speech

Australia’s two-tier policing of hate speech. By Flat White in The Spectator.

A week into Labor’s new hate speech laws, they are only being applied to some people — not to the left’s favorite groups. Surprised?

So far, the only disbanded hate group belongs to the cosplaying neo-Nazis … The only people arrested are members of this group. And the only person who has had their visa cancelled was … an Israeli invited to Australia by the Australian Jewish Association. Whoops! …

Does the government think if they banned the fist of Marxism or the hammer and sickle of communism that history’s most bloodthirsty political system would disband peacefully?

Indeed, why didn’t Labor seek to include these groups in its ban if public safety has become the critical issue?

There are a lot of communists and Marxists shouting antisemitic threats in the street lately, and there are more of them than there are neo-Nazis. These are the groups falsely painting the Jews as Nazis to justify genocidal threats. …

Antisemitism is far more deeply embedded on the left than the right, especially in taxpayer-funded institutions.

(And yes, for the thousandth time, the National Socialists, including the neo variety, are Big State socialist race collectivists. They are left-wing and always were. That’s not to say there isn’t hostility toward Israel in some quarters of the right, there is, but the Marxists, socialists, National Socialists, communists, and fascists are all the same species. There is nothing remotely conservative about them.) …

There has been no outrage from the Prime Minister or the bleeding-heart Left about the desecration of war memorials and precious colonial-era monuments destroyed by self-declared pro-Palestinians who left their mark on the rubble.

 

It’s not like our flag and memorials are rock art

 

And the internet is still full of these ideologies threatening Jewish people and telling Australians that their ‘colony will fall’.

That last slogan is a waking threat against the public safety of every Australian. …

In other words, the hate speech legislation has been a total failure when it comes to protecting Australians, protecting the Jewish community, and removing Islamic radicals from our strained social fabric.

You are always going to have a couple of people who think Hitler was cool, just as there are hundreds of thousands of serious academics who think the murderous Mao and Stalin were ‘great men’. None of this has the slightest bit of relevance to the threat of Islamic terrorism.

Multiple Polls Show Majority Of Americans Want All Illegals Deported

Multiple Polls Show Majority Of Americans Want All Illegals Deported. By ZeroHedge.

A cunning deflection:

For months the political left and a small cadre of centrists (and some libertarians) have been denying reality on immigration and border controls. They claim (as if they are mind readers) that when Donald Trump ran his 2024 election campaign on mass deportations of illegals, voters actually thought he would only deport “violent criminal” illegal aliens, or migrants who committed crimes after crossing the border without permission.

This was never Trump’s policy or promise. It is a carefully crafted propaganda narrative designed to shift the Overton Window and change the nature of the debate. The original point being that all illegal migrants are, in fact, criminals by default and should be deported.

No, Americans see through it:

The “criminal” policy manipulation is an attempt to override the prevailing reason for majority support of strict immigration controls: It’s not only about crime — Americans oppose cultural replacement.

The fight is against multiculturalism and the erasure of western civilization. But leftists and their allies want to divert the discussion into a debate over whether or not each particular migrant “deserves” to be deported. It does not matter. Maybe they a friendly illegal migrant. Maybe not. Either way, they get the boot.

This is the prevailing position of most Americans, as CNN recently discovered in a segment which outlined a series of different polls from different media outlets. All of the polls say the same thing, around 55% to 65% of the US public wants mass deportations of illegal immigrants without question and without qualification. If they are not an official citizen, then they must go. …

The NGO engineered chaos in cities like Minneapolis have not changed anything. …

The overarching motivation of Americans who want deportations is not simply to reduce crime. As many surveys and polls have shown in the past, the public is also concerned about the economy, price inflation caused by high demand, tax dollars being devoured by migrants seeking welfare handouts, not to mention millions of American jobs going to foreigners who work for 30% less under the table. …

And above all else, there’s the agenda to erase western culture and replace it with a multicultural, globalist socialism. The root purpose behind mass immigration from the third world is to deconstruct the West. People are waking up to this reality, and they’re not going accept it.

Westerners never voted for mass immigration from the third world, and every opinion poll in every Western country for decades has said so. Yet it is happening. If the West is indeed democratic, if our political systems are able to express the will of the people. then it will end soon.

The left’s increasingly brazen reliance on third world voters imported en masse will end Western democracy

The left’s increasingly brazen reliance on third world voters imported en masse will end Western democracy. By Stephen Krusier at PJ Media.

There was a time when the Democrats were a bit more subtle. … The 2026 Democrats are feral, reactive beasts and have no ability to hide their feelings or intentions. …

Whenever anyone on the conservative side of the aisle accuses the Democrats of trying to get illegal aliens to the polls to vote, the Dems’ denials are less than convincing.

They are no longer even capable of feigning shock and disgust. The attitude has more of a brazen, “Yeah, and see what you can do to stop us,” vibe.

Why do they resort to importing voters, cheating at polls, and violence and riots?

Once more, with feeling: the Democrats don’t have any coherent, substantive policy ideas to offer legal American voters. That’s why they devote more effort to gaming the voting system than to anything else. They’ve known for decades that the more they strip away election rules and transparency, the easier it would be to get illegals into voting booths.

They need the illegal demographic to make up for the voters they’ve been shedding for the last few years. Real Americans aren’t buying their nonsense. This is from something that Eric wrote yesterday:

“Again, a mere 7% think that cracking down on illegal immigration is not important at all. It seems to me likely these are the ones raising hell on the streets of Minneapolis and in their houses of worship there. So once again, the left takes up the self-defeating 90/10 position. Something of a trend is developing here.”

Follow the money. The income of professional or activist leftists comes from raiding the public purse for their own gain, such as by nice government jobs and contracts or money for NGOs. It doesn’t come from private industry, from offering goods are services that people pay for voluntarily. (It’s a moral difference; leftists mostly get their income from taxation, which is money taken from people against their will, enforced by state power.)

To keep their gains, they need to stay in power by any means possible.

Obviously, importing voters from the third world en masse is vital to staying in power. This, of course, is a toxic policy, completely beyond the pale for most voters. Hence the need for the left to cheat at elections, riot, lie, etc etc.

So, we know for sure that whenever the modern left gets into power, they will import en masse from the third world. Biden did it, Albanese is doing it. Which means that whenever the left gains power, we Westerners get replaced in our own countries — which is an existential risk to us. This has ominous implications for democratic liberal government and the peaceful transfer of power between parties.

Women are conformist (not retarded) for evolutionary reasons, which is radically changing our politics

Women are conformist (not retarded) for evolutionary reasons, which is radically changing our politics. By Devon Eriksen.

No, women are not retarded.

They are conformist.

To fall for, actually fall for, narratives like the Covid story, the BLM story, the ICE is Gestapo story, to actually whole-heartedly believe them, yeah, you would have to be kinda retarded.

But women didn’t “fall for” those stories. Not exactly.

They aligned to them.

This means they went along with them, repeated them, reinforced them, not because they were convinced by evidence, but because they were convinced by the appearance of consensus.

Women are evolved to believe what the rest of the tribe appears to believe. Evidence is not considered. …

Natural selection:

Humans are smart. We survive by being smart. And in order to be smart, we need to grow big brains, and get started growing those brains early. Which means human babies have giant heads. And in order to deliver those giant heads, human babies have to be born prematurely. Otherwise, head won’t fit through pelvic girdle, and baby and mother both die.

This means all human babies are premature. That’s why horses can run at the age of six hours, but humans can’t lift our giant heads for months. This means that human women, whether they are pregnant with a giant-headed baby, caring for a giant-headed baby, or just might be either one at any moment, are uniquely helpless and dependent on the support and goodwill of the tribe.

Metaphorically, and often literally, a woman lives in someone else’s house — not because she’s a useless layabout, but because she is too busy building the future to support herself in the present.

When you’re in that position, you have to keep your controversial ideas to yourself.

And when you evolve in that position, you evolve to have no controversial ideas.

The past:

This was fine for millions of years. There was a division of labor. Women made people, men made stuff. And because the women made all those biological sacrifices to make men with big brains, the men were really good at making stuff. And the stuff was really, really useful, and it became big piles of stuff called “cities”, and then it became a global system of stuff called “civilization”.

The stuff became so valuable that there were big arguments about what to do with the stuff, which was called “politics”. But the women stayed out of politics, because politics was about stuff, stuff was men’s job, and no matter who won the arguments, the winners always made sure the women had enough stuff.

Why?

Because dependent, future-investing, conformist women didn’t evolve in a vacuum. Men evolved along with them. When you have dependent women, you evolve protective men, because tribes full of men who aren’t protective don’t have future generations.

So women didn’t wield political power directly. They were represented by men, and had a lot less skin in the game.

Now:

Eventually, someone decided this was unfair. This idea didn’t happen suddenly, and for no reason at all, but that’s a topic for another day.

But something funny happens when you give political power to women, especially in the form of a vote.

You see, then you have a situation where 50% of the vote is held by people who require a great variety of different persuasion techniques or evidence to convince them of something. And the other 50% is held by women, who are persuaded by only one thing… the appearance of prevailing consensus and power.

And what form of persuasion do you think is cheapest and easiest to project?

Women’s suffrage removes evidence and discourse from politics, and replaces it with “consensus theater”… a puppet show designed to create the illusion of a single prevailing opinion.

 

 

When a narrative prevails, women vote for it, not because they are persuaded, but because it prevails.

This is an explosive feedback loop — a reverse thermostat which turns the air conditioner on when it’s freezing, and runs the furnace all summer.

Because women’s idea of how urgent an issue is comes not from an analysis of the situation, but an analysis of how many people endorse it.

And any opinion, no matter how contrary to obvious facts, no matter how retarded, no matter how destructive, can become the prevailing political platform, so long as women can be convince that most other people think so.

  • Covid was a Chinese bioweapon. The Covid shot was toxic and did not protect against Covid.
  • George Floyd was violent drug zombie who died of an overdose, and Derek Chauvin is in prison merely for being the last guy to touch him.
  • Police officers do not disproportionately kill innocent black men who are minding their own business, and body cams prove this.
  • Men cannot become women. The technology doesn’t exist, and may not ever exist.
  • Diversity is, in fact, our greatest weakness. Diversity + integration = war.
  • America is better off without the vast majority of immigrants, even the ones who don’t murder and steal.
  • Socialism doesn’t work in any unit larger than the extended family. Communism has never worked, and cannot work.
  • Cows are health food. Plants are usually not.
  • Some kids are smarter than others, and we need to invest more effort in them, not less.

All of these things are inherently obvious, and women are not too retarded to see that, because they are not retarded at all. They are merely conformist. Susceptible to political theater.

So democracies cannot permanently survive female suffrage. No one is particularly happy about this, not even curmudgeonly iconoclasts like me who are willing to say it out loud. It’s not only unfair in principle, it’s decidedly inconvenient in practice.

The universe, of course, does not care.

How politically incorrect is that? Probably true, too.

Previous PM Scott Morrison calls on Muslim leaders to embrace wholescale reform to stop ‘political Islam’

Previous PM Scott Morrison calls on Muslim leaders to embrace wholescale reform to stop ‘political Islam’. By Dennis Shanahan in The Australian.

Scott Morrison is urging Muslim leaders to accredit preachers, translate religious teachings into English and clamp down on links to foreign Islamist groups, in a taboo-breaking agenda to cast extremism out from mosques and schools.

In one of the most extraordinary and detailed policy interventions by a former prime minister, Mr Morrison has told the nation’s Islamic leadership that they can no longer avoid serious questions over how they practise and govern their religion in Australia.

 

 

He has also told the imams that they face a post-Bondi reckoning, as Christians did after the child sex abuse royal commission. …

Mr Morrison said in his speech the Muslim community needed nationally consistent standards for imams’ conduct, a countrywide register for preachers, and a self-sufficient Islamic peak body that had the powers to intervene and discipline radicals and antisemites in their institutions.

Blowing away the left’s protection of Islam:

Pre-empting accusations of ­Islamophobia from the political left in Australia, Mr Morrison said the issue of reform in the Australian Muslim leadership could no longer be taboo and he believed Islamic leaders largely wanted to stop radicalism.

“Some will seek to characterise these remarks as hostile to Australia’s Islamic community, and even multiculturalism itself, trolling out the usual accusations of Islamophobia,” he said.

“To the contrary, I am advocating reforms I believe will help religious leaders in our Islamic community keep the wolves from their flock.

“To treat such issues as taboo serves only those who wish to keep these influences opaque and in the dark, where our two homegrown extreme Islamist terrorists were radicalised.

“After December 14, all options to combat antisemitism must be on the table without fear or favour; this includes how Islam is practised and governed in Australia.” …

Islam Australia isn’t liking the national conversation:

The nation’s top imams declared Labor’s antisemitism and hate laws as “Islamophobia in law and practice” while Mr Albanese’s hand-picked Islamophobia envoy cited research from under-fire anti-Israel academic Randa Abdel-Fattah to say the reforms passed last week could be a “rallying cry” against Muslims.

The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils teamed up with antisemitic and radical Islamist body Hizb ut-Tahrir to attack Labor’s move to list the latter as a hate group. …

Learn from how Middle Eastern Governments deal with Islamist ideology:

Mr Morrison said Western countries such as Australia needed to learn from those that were trying to stamp out radicalism. …

Over the past decade, Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Oman, as well as Egypt and Jordan, have taken deliberate ­action to confront radical Islamist ideology,” he said.

“They have reasserted state authority over religious teaching, standardised sermons, licensed imams, and shut down informal or foreign-funded networks that acted as vectors for extremism. Political Islam has been curtailed. …

“No freedom is absolute and such freedom always comes with responsibility.”

At last, someone prominent groping towards a solution.

And of course the left and the Islamists deny there’s any problem in their camp (SMH, by Brittany Busch):

Morrison’s speech drew swift condemnation from Labor MPs and the Australian National Imams Council, which said the comments were “reckless, irresponsible, and deeply ill-informed”.

Treasurer Jim Chalmers said Morrison was a “pretty divisive figure” who was pursuing his own agenda, while Chalmers was confident in the government’s approach to cracking down on antisemitism and hate speech. …

President of the Australian National Imams Council, Imam Shadi Alsuleiman, rejected Morrison’s attempt to draw a line between the Muslim community and the Bondi attack. …

Defence Industry Minister Pat Conroy labelled Morrison’s intervention as “problematic and troubling”, and said Muslim Australians should be able to practise in peace like any other religious group.

“The Liberals are dividing this nation. They’re trying to hold 1 million Australians responsible for the acts of two individuals. And I’m appalled by that, and I oppose it 100 per cent,” he told Sky News.

Clueless or disingenuous liars? You decide. I’d quote from the Koran, but they would pretend it away as usual (or note it was hate speech and throw me in jail).

hat-tip Stephen Neil

Littleproud Speech Goes Viral After Claiming ‘Radical Islam Is the Problem, Not Guns’

Littleproud Speech Goes Viral After Claiming ‘Radical Islam Is the Problem, Not Guns’. By Caldron Pool.

The 40-second clip shows Mr Littleproud criticising the Albanese government’s response to the deadly Bondi attack, using the parliamentary address to accuse Labor of misidentifying the nature of the threat facing Australia and deflecting responsibility through firearms policy. …

“If you do not have the courage to look yourself in the mirror, to look the country in the eye and say it is not guns that are the problem, but it is radical Islam that is the problem, then all you are doing is diverting attention and taking away the rights of lawful Australians,” Mr Littleproud said. …

The video gained significant traction internationally after being shared by high-profile figures, including United States Republican Senator Ted Cruz. Actors John Cleese and Rob Schneider also reposted the clip.

 

 

Democrats Are Willing To Die To End Deportations

Democrats Are Willing To Die To End Deportations. By Eddie Scarry in The Federalist.

When it comes to protecting their years-long project to import destitute foreigners for the purpose of beefing up their share of voters, Democrats are playing for keeps, fatally. …

Democrat voters, particularly white ones, are incensed over deportations, more so than any other issue.

It strikes at the heart of their power on two fronts: bringing in new voters from other countries and continuing their mass welfare schemes.

There is no question that they view the matter as existential. No matter which way you cut it, it’s why two people are dead. The First Amendment right to protest does not include breaking other laws, whether it’s obstructing traffic with a two-ton SUV or with your own body. It also doesn’t include causing a nuisance with bells and whistles to create mayhem and distraction for the purpose of assisting illegal aliens in continuing to violate immigration law. The agitators who insist all of that is their right are mistaken and are rolling the dice each time they do it, fully aware that they’re provoking the use of force from authorities. …

Cannot afford to give in to this. It;s like giving in to a toddler who holds his breath unless you do what she says.

If Trump can win an election but walk away from his policy positions because Democrats are willing to die opposing them, then there was no point in supporting him at all. Law enforcement loses legitimacy the moment officials indicate they’re unwilling to engage in it because of political opposition — even when that opposition is fatalistic. …

Democrats’ willingness to die opposing ICE agents can’t mean that everyone else must sacrifice law enforcement along with the protection and stability it brings.

James Klug:

Hey just so you know, leftists are going to riot for the entire time that a Republican is president for the rest of your life

So you better get tough and get used to it

Is this trend going to spread to Australia? Imagine what the left here would do if Pauline Hanson was elected PM. The wishes of the voting public would count as nothing in the eyes of the left.

Captive Dreamer:

Alex Pretti and Renee Good died because Tim Walz and Jacob Frey refused to allow local and state law enforcement to cooperate with ICE. It’s that simple.

Coddled Affluent Professional:

These were engineered spectacles.

The confrontations were coordinated at a high level and the police were held back to allow them.

The libs who died were fed ideological programming to engage the way they did.

Nothing spontaneous about this – it was cynical political strategy.

The Minnesota police are now clearing protestors hindering law-enforcement, possibly because Trump and Walz had a long phone call. Matt Whitlock:

Alarming that Tim Walz and Jacob Frey had the ability to do this the entire time, but they allowed lunatic activists to harass federal law-enforcement officers and create an unnecessarily violent environment.

[About a dozen more protestors have just been arrested for refusing to disperse the area.]

 

Kyle Becker:

Normie America has weighed in on mass deportations.

Between 55% to 64% want ALL illegals deported. No exceptions.

Don’t let the anti-ICE thugs fool you. They are for chaos, criminals, and corruption. They are against democracy, the rule of law, and YOU.

Kimmel does waterworks:

 

Is ICE like the Gestapo? Only in leftworld.

Is ICE like the Gestapo? Only in leftworld. By Average Person in NY.

Unbelievable how the only historical analogies the left seems capable of reaching for come from the Holocaust. It’s not just lazy, it shows a complete inability to articulate an argument without jumping to the most extreme moral comparison imaginable. When you cannot explain why a policy is wrong on its own terms, you grab the biggest historical evil you can think of and hope the shock does the work for you.

The Gestapo was a central instrument of a genocidal state. Its purpose was not law enforcement. It was ideological cleansing. Gestapo agents moved across Europe identifying Jews who were legal citizens of their countries, people who had lived there for generations, people who posed no threat and committed no crime. They were arrested not for what they did, but for who they were. Millions were rounded up, stripped of rights, transported in cattle cars, and sent toward extermination. Six million Jews were murdered as a result of that system.

The Gestapo’s Jewish Affairs office was headed by Adolf Eichmann, a man whose job was to industrialize deportation. He coordinated trains, schedules, and quotas to ensure entire Jewish communities were erased.

ICE, by contrast, enforces immigration law in a modern democratic country. It arrests people who, by law, are in the country illegally. Not because of their religion. Not because of their ethnicity. Not because of an ideology that says they must be eliminated. In the Minnesota operation, a few hundred people were arrested, and two people were killed in circumstances that are still being debated and investigated. That is tragic, and it is fair to argue that it deserves scrutiny. But scrutiny is not the same thing as historical insanity.

Ugly morality of the left:

To compare this to the Gestapo is to either not understand history or to deliberately cheapen it. It implies that Nazi crimes were just another example of enthusiastic law enforcement. It rewrites the Holocaust as a dispute over paperwork and borders instead of the systematic murder of millions of people.

And there is something especially ugly about Jews being forced to constantly watch the Holocaust turned into a rhetorical prop, used casually to score political points. If every disagreement is Nazism, then nothing is. If every enforcement action is genocide, then genocide itself becomes meaningless.

What they do isn’t moral clarity. It’s moral vandalism.